Ex Parte Gottfurcht et al - Page 1



                The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not            
                written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.            


                        UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                             
                                        ____________                                          
                            BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                
                                     AND INTERFERENCES                                        
                                        ____________                                          
                   Ex parte ELLIOT A. GOTTFURCHT, GRANT E. GOTTFURCHT                         
              J. TEAGUE MCKNIGHT, MANUEL V. BELTRAN, STEPHEN K. WOESNER,                      
                        JOHN A. MARINUZZI, ALBERT-MICHEL C. LONG                              
                                  and DONALD L. DUKESHIRE                                     
                                        ____________                                          
                                   Appeal No. 2006-2191                                       
                                Application No. 10/108,147                                    
                                        ____________                                          
                                 HEARD: SEPTEMBER 13, 2006                                    
                                        ____________                                          
           Before KRASS, RUGGIERO, and SAADAT, Administrative Patent Judges.                  
           SAADAT, Administrative Patent Judge.                                               

                                     DECISION ON APPEAL                                       
                This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from                    
           the Examiner’s final rejection of claims 40-45, 54-59 and 105-                     
           137.  Claims 1-17, 39, 46-53 and 60-77 have been canceled while                    
           claims 18-38 and 78-104 have been withdrawn from consideration.                    
                We reverse.                                                                   
                                         BACKGROUND                                           
                Appellants’ invention is directed to a method and system for                  
           facilitating navigation of the Internet or other content sources                   






Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007